Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutASRPC20201027 5.1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT 5.1 TO: Chair and Planning Commission October 27, 2020 SUBJECT: Consider approval of Resolution No. 2020-09 denying an appeal and uphold the Town’s conditional approval of Tree Removal request TR20-0019 related to the un-permitted removal of 11 Town-protected trees including two Live Oak trees (Quercus agrifolia) and nine California Bay Laurel trees (Umbellularia californica), varying in size from 10” to 26” in diameter. The property is located at 10 Margaret Lane (Project Manager: Bob Russell) BACKGROUND The Town was notified that the property owner at 10 Margaret Lane was performing illegal grading work and had removed several Town-protected trees. The Town visited the site and confirmed the illegal work. As a result, a “Stop Work Order” was issued on July 14, 2020 (Attachment C). On August 5, 2020 the property owner retroactively submitted an application and arborist report (Attachment E) for the removal of eleven Town-protected trees, including: two-Live Oak trees (Quercus agrifolia) with 12”& 26” diameters; and nine California Bay Laurel trees (Umbellularia californica) with 10”, 10.5”, 13”, 17”, 19”, 20”, 21”, 22”, and 23” diameters measured at 4.5’ above the ground, as outlined within the arborist report. During the Town’s site visit, the location of the trees removed and the condition of the remaining stumps near ground level were reviewed. The conditions of the stumps indicated that the trees were viable before they were removed. On September 10, 2020, the Town administratively approved the removal of the eleven trees subject to Conditions of Approval which included mitigation measures to provide for on-site or off-site tree replacement (Attachment D). On September 14, 2020, a letter was received from Johnathan Black of Weston Law Group, legal counsel for the property owner appealing, the Conditions of Approval (Attachment E). DESCRIPTION The mitigation measures within the Conditions of Approval state that the owner is responsible to provide on-site or off-site replacement for a total of 194 inches, equal to the total diameter of the removed trees. This value represents a replacement ratio of one 15- gallon tree per each two-inch diameter of removed trees and one 24 inch box tree for each four-inch diameter of removed trees for the eleven removed Town-protected trees (minimum of 97-15 gallon or 48-24” box trees, or a combination thereof). Council for the property owner (Mr. Black) states the Conditions of Approval’s mitigation 10 Margaret Lane 2 October 27, 2020 measures were incorrectly calculated and the total diameter of trees under the mitigation measures based on the arborist’s report by Patrick W. Morgan of Hamilton Tree Service’s should be 140.5 inches, not 194 inches. Mr. Black states the three dead trees listed on the arborist report should not be included in the inventory list due to the owner’s concerns regarding fire mitigation and should not have been included as part of the tree replacement mitigation measures. EVALUATION Tree Preservation Ordinance The Town’s Tree Preservation Ordinance (Municipal Code Section 32-79) lists the Live Oaks (Quercus agrifolia) and California Bay Laurel (Umbellularia californica) as a Town- protected tree and requires that a Tree Removal permit be approved by the Town prior to removal. The Ordinance specifies criteria that the Town shall consider when deciding on a Tree Removal application (Attachment F). The following is the specified criteria and the Town’s position related to each item: 1. The condition of the tree(s) with respect to its health, imminent danger of falling, proximity to existing structures, and interference with utility infrastructure. According to the Tree Report submitted by property owner from Hamilton Tree Service, the report shows that there were 13 trees reviewed, eleven were listed as previously removed and two other trees proposed for future removal. The arborist considered three of the trees that were removed to have been dead (Attachment E). There is no evidence that the trees presented a safety hazard beyond what would be normally associated with these types of trees and, based on the Town’s inspection of the stumps, all appeared to be alive prior to removal. The property owner expressed concerns regarding fire safety and the proximity of the trres to the residence. However, the trees that were removed were approximately 100’+/- from the residence. The trees that were removed are typical of an oak woodland and do not typically require watering. 2. The necessity to remove the tree(s) to allow for the reasonable use, enjoyment, or development of the property. The property owner states that the trees were removed to create space for future solar panels. It is the Town’s opinion that the solar panels could have been designed to work with the existing trees rather than removing the trees. The proposed solar panels could have been easily designed to avoid the trees with appropriate setback to minimize impacts. 10 Margaret Lane 3 October 27, 2020 3. The age and/or size of the protected tree with regard to the appropriateness of the size of the area in which the tree is planted and whether its removal would encourage healthier, more vigorous growth of other plant material in the area. Not applicable. 4. If none of the above criteria are satisfied, the Planning Commission may authorize removal if it finds that, due to the location of the tree on the property and its orientation as it related to the residence on the property and/or actively used yard areas, the tree is unreasonably adversely impacting the property owner's enjoyment and/or use of the property. In this case, mitigation tree replacement plantings may be required as found appropriate by the Planning Commission. This finding can be made at the discretion of the Planning Commission. 5. The effect of the removal of the tree upon soil erosion or whether its removal will result in a significant diversion or increase in the flow of surface water. The removal of the trees will not likely have a significant negative effect upon soil erosion or result in a significant diversion or increase in the flow of surface water. 6. The number, species, size, and location of other protected trees in the area and the effect the removal of the tree(s) will have upon shade, privacy between properties, and scenic beauty of the area. There are numerous existing trees in this neighborhood. However, the tree removals will have an effect on privacy between the subject property and the existing residence to the east and the north. 7. Possible visual impacts within a Town-identified Major Ridgeline or Scenic Hillside Area created as a result of the tree removal. This site is not located within a Major Ridgeline or Scenic Hillside area. PUBLIC CONTACT Public notice of the October 27, 2020 meeting was mailed to property owners within 350 feet of the site. A total of 20 notices were mailed to surrounding property owners. Posting of the meeting agenda serves as notice to the general public. RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution No. 2020-09 denying an appeal and upholding the Town’s conditional approval of Tree Removal request TR20-0019 related to the un-permitted removal of 11 Town-protected trees including two Live Oak trees (Quercus agrifolia) and nine California 10 Margaret Lane 4 October 27, 2020 Bay Laurel trees (Umbellularia californica), varying in size from 10” to 26” in diameter. The property is located at 10 Margaret Lane. Prepared by: Bob Russell Landscape Architect Attachments: A - Resolution No. 2020-09 B - Public Notification, Notification Map and Notification List CC C - Stop Work Order, dated July 14, 2020 D - Appealable Action Letter dated September 10, 2020 E - Letter of Appeal dated September 14, 2020 F - Arborist Report dated July 18, 2020 G - Section 32-79.6 of the Danville Municipal Code Related to Tree Removal RESOLUTION NO. 2020-09 RESOLUTION NO. 2020-09 DENYING AN APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE TOWN’S CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF TREE REMOVAL REQUEST TR20-0019 RELATED TO THE UN-PERMITTED REMOVAL OF 11 TOWN-PROTECTED TREES INCLUDING TWO LIVE OAK TREES (QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA) AND NINE CALIFORNIA BAY LAUREL TREES (UMBELLULARIA CALIFORNICA), VARYING IN SIZE FROM 10” TO 26” IN DIAMETER 10 MARGARET LANE (APN: 199-160-015) WHEREAS, PHILIP AND CRYSTAL FERREIRA (Owner/Applicant) requested approval of a Tree Removal permit TR20-0019 to allow authorization for the previously removed 11 Town-protected trees; and WHEREAS, the trees removed without a permit include eleven Town-protected trees: two Live Oaks (Quercus agrifolia) with 12”& 26” diameters; and nine California Bay Laurel trees (Umbellularia californica) with 10”, 10.5”, 13”, 17”, 19”, 20”, 21”, 22”, and 23” diameters measured 4.5 feet above grade as specified within the project arborist report; and WHEREAS, the 1.9 acre lot is located with the Town’s R-65; Single Family Residential District at 10 Margaret Lane and is further identified as Assessor’s Parcel Number 199- 160-015; and WHEREAS, the Town sent an appealable action letter to the applicant on September 10, 2020, conditionally approving the Tree Removal request; and WHEREAS, on September 14, 2020, the Town received an appeal of that action from Johnathan Black of Weston Law Group, legal counsel for the property owner; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did review the project at a noticed public hearing on October 27, 2020; and WHEREAS, the public notice of this action was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, a staff report was submitted recommending that the Planning Commission deny the appeal and uphold the Town’s conditional approval of the Tree Removal request; and ATTACHMENT A PAGE 2 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2020-09 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and consider all reports, recommendations, and testimony submitted in writing and presented at the hearing; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the Town of Danville denies the appeal and upholds the Town’s conditional approval for Tree Removal request TR20-0019. FINDINGS OF APPROVAL 1. The removal of two Town-protected Live Oaks (Quercus agrifolia) and nine California Bay Laurel (Umbellularia californica) was not warranted due to their generally good health, location adjacent to top of bank abutting drainage swale and not in close proximity to the residence on the lot. However, the tree removals will be mitigated through required conditions of approval. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. This permit is a retroactive approval for the removal of the two-Live Oak trees (Quercus agrifolia) with 12”& 26” diameters; nine California Bay Laurel (Umbellularia californica) with 10”,10.5”,13”,17”,19”,20”,21”,22”,23” as detailed within the project file maintained by the Town of Danville and labeled “TR20–0019 Tree Removal – 10 Margaret Lane.” 2. As a mitigation measure, the owner shall be responsible to provide for on-site or off-site replacement tree planting for a total 194” inches of trees removed. This value represents the total tree loss at a replacement ratio of one 15 gallon tree per each two-inch diameter of removed trees or one 24” box size tree for each four- inch diameter of removed trees (minimum of 97-15 gallon or 48-24” box trees, or a combination thereof). The replacement tree planting shall be from the Town of Danville’s Protected Species List (attached) in a location of their choice within the common open space area for said property or, at the discretion of the property owner. The owner may choose a payment of an in-lieu mitigation fee, which shall be made payable to the Town of Danville. If the in-lieu mitigation fee option is selected, the fee shall be in the amount of $250.00 per 15gallon tree or $500 per 24” box tree for a total of $24,250 required for tree mitigation. This mitigation fee is based on the lowest recent bid result to install 15-gallon and/or 24” box trees in recent Town-sponsored capital improvement projects. Any in-lieu mitigation fees received by the Town shall be applied to an account chosen by the Town for use by the Danville Maintenance Department to allow the purchase, planting, and maintenance of beautification trees within the Town of Danville. PAGE 3 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2020-09 APPROVED by the Danville Planning Commission at a special meeting on October 27, 2020 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAINED: ABSENT: ______________________________ CHAIR APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: _______________________________ ______________________________ CITY ATTORNEY CHIEF OF PLANNING ATTACHMENT B “Small Town Atmosphere Outstanding Quality of Life” 5 1 0 L A G O N D A W A Y , D A N V I L L E , C A L I F O R N I A 9 4 5 2 6 Administration Building Engineering & Planning Transportation Maintenance Police Parks and Recreation (925) 314-3388 (925) 314-3330 (925) 314-3310 (925) 314-3310 (925) 314-3450 (925) 314-3410 (925) 314-3400 July 14, 2020 Ferreira P R/C A Fam Trust Or Current Owner 9000 Crow Canyon Road #S222 Danville, CA 94526 RE: Stop Work Order –Grading/Encroachment (10 Margaret Lane) Current Owner: The Town of Danville has issued a “STOP WORK ORDER” on your property at 10 Margaret Lane, in response to a violation of the Danville Municipal Code. Work underway should cease immediately and a permit application and plans must be submitted to the Danville Development Services Department within 20 business days from the issuance of the Stop Work Order. The following items will need to be addressed in order to correct the violations: 1.) Revised Grading and Drainage Plan a.Plan should include topo of entire property to the north and beyond top of bank. b.Plan should show proposed keyways, benching and subdrains per soils engineer’s recommendations c.Plan should include how and where surface and subsurface drainage is being released to an approved drainage facility d.Plan should show any proposed retaining walls e.Plan should delineate the entire grading daylight limit line. f.Plan should show all tree trunks and label species and trunk diameter within 20’ of property line 2.) Erosion Control Plan 3.) Soils report stamped and signed by the project geotechnical engineer a.Recommendations in the report should be based on review of the current site and grading plan b.Report should document if the imported soil is acceptable as fill material 4.) Tree removal permit for the Town protected trees previously removed. (10 trees observed or shown in prior arborist report) Chief of Planning will determine required remediations for violations of the Tree Preservation Ordinance. The Town is requesting that you correct and address the above items and submit the necessary plans in order to ensure that it meets all planning and engineering requirements by July 29, 2020. Please be advised that failure to comply with this notice will result in the recording of a Notice of Non-Compliance against the property with the County Recorder and/or the matter being referred to the City Attorney for nuisance abatement. If you have any questions regarding this ATTACHMENT C October 21, 2020 Page 2 letter, you may contact me at (925) 314-3361 or ppadaoan@danville.ca.gov. Thank you in advance for your prompt consideration of this matter. Sincerely, Perlita Padaoan Code Enforcement Officer Cc: Ferreira P R/C Fam Trust – sent via email: phil@webcorp.com ATTACHMENT D ATTACHMENT E ATTACHMENT F ATTACHMENT G